What is there to expound upon?  You all can read it for yourselves, or are you all THAT blind?

Fine.

Baby steps....

Someone offers argument A.  You offer argument B, but also berate argument A and the poster of argument A as incompetent.

That A person responds not with acusations and libel, but with exhibit C to support his/her argument.  And does NOT personally attack B.

B then simply goes into personal attacks and defense mode.

Need I go on?  It is quite obvious to anyone with vision, and common sense.

It is exceedingly childish to personally attack those with a different view than yours.  ESPECIALLY when you are trying to convince others that YOU are the tolerant one...

Maybe? What makes you think atheists don't or haven't faced such things? Should we all make up a God simply because it might be easier to explain fairy tales than truth? Who's dodging the issues here? The person willing to teach their children the truth as they know it or the ones who make up fairy tales to explain away everything bad in life?  What did parents tell their children before your God was created by man? What do Hindu or Buddhists tell their children? Have you opened your mind enough to see how others have dealt with these issues or is it simply easier to stick with the status quo?

Many atheist actually do practice religion and many introduce their children to religion so that they have that option if they choose or to show their children what others are squawking about. Most of the atheists I have known since childhood who have gone on to have children decided to give their children various religious upbringings. Have you not seen neighbors, friends, or relatives do such a thing? Why are there so many atheists who practice religion even though they do not believe in God the same way that you do? Some continue practicing all their lives and some only until their children get to a certain age.

The only thing you have advocated is that others consider your experiences and your God over their own experiences. What has been rejected here? Your interpretation of the Bible? Well guess what....The Bible is rejected by more than just a few atheists. Get used to it.

Why should anybody other than your own family and friends listen to you? I'd rather listen to Lulu because I was not raised in the Catholic Church and have much to learn about the specifics of that religion. I'd rather listen to my Christians friends because I have built faith and understanding in them over the years. I'd rather listen to the pastor who lives down the street because he has shown himself to be honest, tolerant, and open minded. I'd rather listen to the Jehovah's who show up at my door every few years because they are willing to actually explain what they believe and why.

You seemed to have missed the posts where some have stated that they do have religious backgrounds, experiences, family, friends and acquaintances so maybe you should be open up your mind a bit and figure out that somebody disputing the bible, or a specific religious institution has more to do with the Bible and that institution than you. You are just one in over 7 billion and counting so don't expect your experience to have any more significance than all the others.  

This has got to be the one of the few forums, where believers in God or gods, outweigh Atheists. It has also taught me something. On other forums where there are more Atheists, the people who believe in God or gods seem foolish in their arguments, but here, the Atheists seem foolish in their arguments.

I believe that this proves, both sides have already made their decision on what they believe, and simple numbers makes one side appear better than the other.

I haven't expressed pity for you nor tried to explain your life for you.  Just suggested there might be other things to consider you haven't seen and suggested you should be open minded--in all things.

I am sorry to hear what happened with your children.

David, I am an atheist so save your pity for someone who can use it.  My children died a long time ago ... but thanks. You my friend do not suggest anything ... much the same as The Catholic (TC). Neither of you listen to much if anything of anything opposing your views … even when you ask the question. As soon as I answer, you or TC pops up to tell me I am all wrong (about myself) and then commence to tell me what I actually meant. Until you stop this nonsense, find someone else to bother. I prefer to chat with grownups … I just wish you had paid some attention to me earlier.

I am also sorry for your loss, be it long ago or not. 

There should be no hostility here, BoobzTwo.  I don't think I have said you where wrong, I just disagree with how you try to portray what you think.  I'm not saying it is wrong, I'm just trying to get clarification, and you just seem to get emotional.

Lets just cut through the crap and deal with the real issues here.... Science and God.

And interesting observation, to say the least, no?

So is it really pack rules, or is there a such thing as free will?

Segment A: You believe in God but cannot prove His existence now or ever in any real sense.

Segment B: I believe you have to at least prove something exists in order to actually discuss it in any real sense.

          Hypothesis: This is not going to work out well oh my...

1st rebuttle: ok, well what can you offer me as proof … but you are an idiot whether you can or not, gurrr.

2nd rebuttle: I know you are a nice gal, but I think you might be mistaken and here is why… enter Exhibit C…

Exhibit C: My priest gave me this book and it like just explains everything and all you have to do is have a little faith … hum, without which you will burn forever in hell … no pressure … all friends here.

And then I commence to browbeat the poor innocent sucker, huh … that about how you see it.

Not very realistic from my point of view. I have no problem discussing God or Science ... but I have big problems trying to discuss them together.

@Boobz--it was sympathy, not pity.  I am sorry no matter how long ago it was.

You can't have a personal discussion framed as an intellectual debate--it loses the "personal" at that point.  You can't have a debate if you take it personally.

If I had a better idea (as I think I do now) where you were coming from, I'd have tried a different approach--but a public discussion would never have worked--and isn't doing so now.

If you had started the topic, I'd have been more deferential in answering your questions but the topic is tipped off of how it began.  Basically people are fighting in an effort to redefine it.

Smoothseas is just a pot-stirrer and isn't really contributing more than role-playing Simon Cowell in the first seasons of American Idol.  If you insist on "teaming" in posts with him it's going nowhere, whether I'm in the conversation or not.

I'm sorry you got offended and good luck in finding whatever it is you need.

This is not okay.

The mods have been very lenient allowing an openly religious thread to go on for this long, but when you start openly insulting groups of people like that (some of whom are Stardock customers, by the way...), that privilege may very well be revoked. 

People are still discussing "Science and God" are they not?

Looks to me like you simply want the discussion to only include Science and God if  "God" is presupposed to exist in your terms?

You claimed the thread was being hijacked and continue to claim that others are trying to redefine it, however people are quoting you and replying to what you are posting so who exactly is redefining what,and what definition of science and God are you trying to restrict the conversation to?

Assume much? Instead of asking why I would skip your posts, you assume I'm Christian and then proceed to insult all Christians. Furthermore, lather on the condescension. If you really want dialogue, I recommend a little self-awareness on your delivery. If you just want to assume incorrect things, insult, be condescending, and swing a club like a brute then I will tune you out. The former is worth my time, the latter is a waste.

Its not a redefinition if you try to keep things impersonal and factual, rather than emotional and biased.

The hijacking is when people simply "hahaha" peoples opinions and berate and personally attack them.  If this is to be a civil discussion, people need to stick to the issues and theories, not the personal insults.

Let's hear some personal theories and experiences, not just childish banter.